Funktron3000

Funktron3000 t1_ivmhghb wrote

Reply to comment by lMickNastyl in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

I think we agree more than we disagree. Things have definitely seemed crazy and hostile for the past several years.

The part that we disagree on is the public shaming aspect. It’s ok that we disagree by the way. In my view, the best bet is to shine the light on ignorance. There is no need to insult or demean. The ignorant parties will do that work for you. Acting hostile in response tends to breed and provoke more hostility.

This video is a good example of a style that I prefer. Notice the interviewers aren’t dicks at any point. They just ask questions and shine the light.

https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/comments/yptuhx/so_scary_and_funny_at_the_same_time_smh/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

1

Funktron3000 t1_ivlm7bv wrote

Reply to comment by lMickNastyl in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

Yeah, I certainly understand your point and the logic behind it. I don’t agree though, personally. There are strategies to deal with bad faith actors other than becoming a bad faith actor for the opposite side. But that’s just a matter of strategy and opinion. I’m going to stick with my morals no matter what others do. Thanks for the genuine response

2

Funktron3000 t1_ivkzf1k wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

You’re probably right. Doesn’t seem to be a good thing though, does it? As individuals, we can always decide whether to continue the cycle or break it, and move forward in a healthier way.

5

Funktron3000 t1_ivky751 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

I’m aware of a lot of bad actors involved with politics. Not saying it’s a 50/50 split but they exist on both sides. It seems like you’re not discussing in good faith. Even though we probably voted similarly, I think you’re part of the problem.

2

Funktron3000 t1_ivkwi3e wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

I never insisted that you shrug anything off with a smile. I just felt that your comment didn’t actually provide any useful insight. It was just an insult. Not helpful and mildly harmful. Of course, it could have been much worse…but what was the point? Was it cathartic?

4

Funktron3000 t1_ivkvhf5 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

You and I probably agree about the merits of Bolduc as a candidate…but your response is really just a snarky diss. Personally I find the extreme partisanship and constant attacks to be pretty awful. We are all still neighbors after all. We can have different ideas without being toxic toward one another.

7

Funktron3000 t1_ivktv0r wrote

Reply to comment by TreePointOhhhhh in Who got your vote? by uzernaimed

What was appealing about Bolduc to you? I consider myself independent and voted for a mix of R, D, and L candidates…but after researching them all, Bolduc was the one who seemed the worst of all. Im not surprised in today’s hyper partisan environment that he’d get many votes from people voting straight red…but I am curious if Bolduc was genuinely appealing to you?

12

Funktron3000 t1_ivkrki2 wrote

From my view, you can both be correct. Higher demand than supply allows a supplier to increase prices, thereby increasing profits

To help consumers, we could look at a few different strategies:

  1. How do we increase supply?
  2. How do we reduce demand?
  3. Should profits (gouging?) be limited despite the supply/demand situation?
1